Sadly, not many people know about the subject that is anthropology and even more do not know what it means. So it is understandable that the super stars of the anthropological universe are not seen as such outside of anthropology. And when they do become noticed, it is their accomplishments that make the headlines, not their line of work...at least not til recently. In this blog I will speak of the famous cultural anthropologist, Margaret Mead.It seems as though Mead was destined to become an anthropologist seeing how both her parents were social scientists. In her time she was seen as a pioneer. What I mean by this is her research (which she conducted for nine months in 1925) in Samoa was a huge hit, revered by both psychologists and anthropologists. Her research, in which she wanted to see if the pain and uneasiness of adolescence was univeral, brought her to Samoa. She explained in her book “Coming of Age in Samoa (published in 1928)” that the years of the Samoa adolescence was free to do as they pleased (ex: have casual sex, few responsibilites, “easy relations with parents and other kin, and consequently a period of harmony rather than disequilibrium and strife.”). With these findings she made the conclusion that it was culture, not biology that was responsible for the “storm and stress” of American youth. Because of her research and this book, it is said that she caused a sexual revolution in America. That said, her findings have come to have a lot of controversy. For one, there is an anthropologist from New Zealand named Derek Freeman, who in 1983 published a book “Margaret Mead and Samoa: The Making and Unmaking of an Anthropological Myth” in which he challenged many of Mead's claims. For example, Mead had claimed that because of the sexual freedom the Samoan's had there was no rape, which Freeman commented that rape was common and that premarital sex was disapproved of. He also spoke with the young woman (who were now older women) who told him “They had lied to her, inventing wild tales about premarital sex to impress her. Freeman even tracked down one of her informants (by then an old woman) who admitted exactly this.” Although, Mead supporters have her back. What I mean by this is they have reasons why the information Freeman obtained contrasts with Mead's. Reason for the girls telling him they lied was most likely a lie to Freeman because when Mead went to Samoa she was a young woman close in age to them, but Freeman was a middle-aged man. And the biggest defense of Mead's study was the time. She conducted her study in the 1920's while Freeman did his in the 1980's, so something must have changed. Nevertheless, “some Samoans have found her depiction of Samoan adolescent sexuality offensive.” Even though Mead's name seems to have been dragged through the mud, she was, as I stated earlier, a pioneer. She was one of the founders of Psychological Anthropology and inadvertently created biological (physical) anthropology. What I mean by this is that “many also rejected the relevance of the biological sciences for illuminating anything about social behavior and social organization” because social scientists “were coming to reject the view that western civilization, the white race, the male sex represented the pinnacle of the human evolutionary process.” Of course physical anthropologists know better now, but we have to remember how racism ran rampant in the United States for a good part of the 1900's (and still does). Please feel free to comment on what you thought of this fun fact, or other physical anthropological subjects you would like me to cover.

In a blog early on (http://anthropologicalconcepts.weebly.com/blog/bipedalism-one-step-closer-to-becoming-homo-sapien) I spoke of how being bipedal was a huge step for our evolutionary ancestors. I covered the advantages of this evolutionary breakthrough in said blog, but I did not go into the disadvantages. This blog will cover just that. And these are disadvantages that we live through or are going to live through thanks to the thing that helped keep our species alive. By this I mean I will speak of pain, stress, or damage that being bipedal can cause. It seems to be normal for the birthing process to be painful for human females, but it was not always. As I stated in my blog describing the difference between the male and female skeletal structure (http://anthropologicalconcepts.weebly.com/blog/male-or-female), the shape and position of the human female pelvis is what makes birthing painful. The human birthing process is “weird” by other animal's standards. The average time a human female spends in labour is a good nine or more hours, while all other primates give birth within two hours. Another evolutionary problem that makes birth painful is the size of the skull. The reason this is also evolution's fault is because bigger brains means bigger skulls. This is also why, when human babies are born, they are helpless because they have not completely...formed in a way. If they were to stay long enough to be more cognitive, like let us say a baby chimpanzee, the head would be too big to get through the birth canal and will most likely kill the mother. “we need a wide pelvis to bear big-brained babies but a narrow one to walk or run efficiently.” There is something only humans can do because of our bipedalism, but with this something it causes stress but can cause pain later in life. What I am talking about is lifting heavy objects. You may have heard the phrase “lift with your knees not with your back.” While that is optimum, the knees are not very happy about it. After a while with lifting or just running the cartilage and joint fluid (lubricant) that is between the femur and tibia can wear down, and when it does that leads to knee pain because the bones will now be rubbing directly against each other. This in turn cases arthritis. Even if your knees get the focus when lifting heavy things, just walking, not even running, can affect the lumbar (lower back) region. Reason for this is when walking the curve of the lumbar region (image below) absorbs the shock. This is a good thing because without the shock absorbing lumbar it would be incredibly painful to walk. The entire back would hurt if it were straight; that or we would still be quadrupedal. There are also cases of slipped discs (“a vertebral disc that is displaced or partly protruding, pressing on nearby nerves and causing back pain or sciatica.”), but that mainly happens because of injury or weakness; also these can happen anywhere in the vertebrae, not just the lumbar region.

This last condition applies not so much to the bone, but to the veins. It is called varicose veins (images below). Although many factors can effect the probability of getting this condition, one main one is being bipedal. Reason being is humans are fairly tall for being bipedal, “the circulatory system has to move blood from the legs to the heart. In some cases, the valves in the veins of the legs break down and blood pools, causing the veins to bulge.” Do not fret, it happens to about fifty to fifty-five percent of women and even less in men at forty to forty-five percent, but this statistic is only for those in the United States. As I stated at the beginning of this paragraph there are many factors, so the likeliness for someone to get these types of veins without these factors is very minute. The first factor is going to happen to all of us, which is getting older, but with this you would have to take into account medical history (this included being born with weak veins or having family members with vein problems), obesity (which puts extra pressure on the veins), or lack of movement (“Sitting or standing for a long time may force your veins to work harder to pump blood to your heart. This may be a bigger problem if you sit with your legs bent or crossed.”). This condition cannot be cured, but it can be treated.

With everything that can and does go wrong because of the main source of transportation for humans, it almost does not seem worth it. Almost. When you think about it, it is worth the risk of being bipedal. Some may think that evolution “screwed us over,” but without being bipedal, we would most likely either not have evolved as much as we have, or would have been eaten to extinction (yay for being able to look over tall grass). I think the pro's of being bipedal greatly outweigh the con's.​ Please feel free to comment on what you thought of the blog, or other physical anthropological subjects you would like me to cover.

From a very young age, no more than a year old, Hanabi-Ko was taught basic sign language (“FOOD, DRINK and MORE, to emotional signs like: SAD, LOVE, GOOD, and SORRY to more sophisticated signs like: OBNOXIOUS, FAKE, and POLITE, and epithets like: STUPID DIRTY TOILET”) by her adoptive mother Penny. When she was about 5 she got a brother, Michael who was rescued after seeing his mother killed (her caretaker was hoping they would fall in love in a romantic way, but because they were together since a young age, they became siblings instead of lovers). The two of them were taught sign language together; Hanabi-Ko helping Michael with the corresponding signs to the corresponding situations. At around the age of 11 Hanabi-Ko was seen as being able to be gentle with the smallest of creatures, in this case tiny tree frogs around her yard. She captured one, and cradled it gently under her arm (keeping it safe from Michael). After holding it for a while, she sets it down on some rocks in an area to protect it from “possible rough play.” This was the first example of her “innate gentleness and nurturing spirit towards small, vulnerable creatures, and her regard for other species.” but it certainly was not her last. A year after her gentle frog play, she received a kitten, whom she named “All Ball (All Ball because they did not have a tail).” Hanabi-Ko loved All Ball, always playing with them, but this joy did not last long. Only 6 months after her 12th birthday, the day she received her kitten, All Ball was hit by a car. Hanabi-Ko was heartbroken, signing about her friend's death for days after getting the bad news. It was a while until she was ready for another kitten. But in 1985 she chose two kittens, who she named Lips Lipstick, because unlike All Ball, they had a pink nose and mouth, and the second kitten she named Smoky because they looked like a cat in one of her books. Smokey passed away 20 years later due to natural causes, but recently, in 2015, she chose two more kittens, Miss Black and Miss Grey. In 1991 Koko selected a possible love for her named Ndume who was 10 at the time. I will now stop beating around the bush, this special blog is about the lovable, adorable, talking gorilla, Koko, whose birthday happens to be today. Her full name means “Fireworks Child.” The awareness the work she has done with her caretaker, Penny, has caused great changes in how people saw gorillas. It was because of the results of the unique communicative possibilities Koko gave rise to The Gorilla Foundation. Michael's rescue was because of The Gorilla Foundation who gave him a home. Sadly on June 29th of 2000, Michael passed away due to a major cardiovascular diseases found in gorillas (humans too) called fibrosing cardiomyopathy. That said, after learning sign language Michael was able to tell his story, and it is because of his ability to do so, he raised awareness of gorilla hunting. With the passing of Michael, Koko is the only talking gorilla left. However, we need not to worry about Koko. She still has her kittens to look after, Ndume (whose name translates to “Male” in Swahili), and her long time friend, Dr. Francine Penny Pattersonwho is not only responsible for teaching Koko sign language, but is also the founder of The Gorilla Foundation, best known for “Project Koko.” Here is a link to the website if you would like to know more about Koko: http://www.koko.org. And below I have included a documentary titled “A Conversation with Koko the Gorilla.” I will end with this. I wish Koko a very happy 45th birthday, with many coming...and with them probably kittens on the way. I hope you have enjoyed this Koko centered special blog entry.

Levi-Strauss is a big name in the anthropological community. He is not a physical anthropologist, but some of his theories and books read that way. Indirectly he was sort of involved with evolution, but more of the process our brains went through to get to where we are today. In the following blog I will discuss what kind of anthropologist he was, his thoughts on language, kinship, and magic. With the tree of subjects in anthropology, from physical, to linguistic, to archaeology, to cultural, it does not seem there is more than these main branches. But if you have been following this blog you know that from these branches there are so many more. Structural anthropology branches off from cultural. Levi-Strauss was the founder of this school of anthropology. The way he designed this idea was according to his “theories, universal patterns in cultural systems are products of the invariant structure of the human mind.” In layman terms he is saying that our minds are never changing and that is how the systems of culture are produced. Let us take the Native American culture as an example. Sure, the Europeans tried to turn them into God fearing “modern” peoples, but nowadays, even though much of their culture has been lost to the times, there are still things in modern Native American Culture in which their ancestors would be comfortable partaking in. Structural anthropology is as if saying “you can take the human out of the wild but you can't take the wild out of the human,” or something to that extent. So where does language tie into this? This is not linguistic anthropology. Yes, this is not linguistic, but the kind of language Levi-Strauss was interested in was the type that had to do with kinship. When it comes to a cultures, and I mean any culture, what is the one thing that ties them together? Skin colour? No; with the rise in immigration throughout a myriad of counties, cultures have a whole array of colours. And it is not foods either. The thing that ties cultures together is language. If the peoples of a culture spoke entirely different languages, there would be no culture. Reason being is that a paramount of culture is being able to share information, either through speech or written words. Although, that said, this is the cultural part of Levi-Strauss' mind set, not the structural anthropological. When language is looked at from a structural point of view Levi-Strauss compares language to myth, "Myth is language, functioning on an especially high level where meaning succeeds practically at 'taking off' from the linguistic ground on which it keeps rolling." His reasoning for this is because myth has attributes that can only be in myth, so he sees it as its own language. What I mean by this is unlike poetry which can get lost in translation, myth can be translated into many languages but still keeps the core of “myth." “According to Levi-Strauss, this is due to the nature of the structural components which make up a myth which are irreducible and recurrent across myths.” At the beginning of this blog I mentioned “magic.” The type of magic Levi-Strauss spoke of is not what you would think of. This type of magic, Levi-Strauss theorizes, were the first steps towards religion. What he means by this is for magic to work, you have to believe in it; so belief ties magic and religion together. Some of our (as in the human race) earliest experience in religion would be with the shaman. This magical doctor who uses all matter of liquids and powders, and those who go to them somehow get better; the major factor in this is belief. With this in mind, Levi-Strauss “seems to think that psychoanalysis and the shamanistic performance he describes are structured the same way. He seems to feel that psychoanalysis can learn from shamanistic performance.” He criticized psychoanalysis for basically only observing and grouping their patients together (OCD, ADHD, ect.), but not curing them.. All in all, I am glad I have delved into a completely different school of anthropology. It is so amazing to think that the theories of one man could have such an effect on such a wide practice. I have said it once, and I will say it again, as long as there are humans, there will always be a need for an anthropologist. ​ Please feel free to comment on what you thought of the blog, or other physical anthropological subjects you would like me to cover.